We draw on conversation analytic methods and research to explicate the interactional phenomenon of requesting in general and the specific case of requesting participation in survey interviews. Recent work on survey participation gives much attention to leverage-saliency theory but does not explore how the key concepts of this theory are exhibited in the actual unfolding interaction of interviewers and potential respondents. We examine interaction using digitally recorded and transcribed calls to recruit participation in the 2004 Wisconsin Longitudinal Study. We describe how potential respondents present interactional environments that are relatively discouraging or encouraging, and how, in response, interviewers may be relatively cautious or presumptive in their requesting actions. We consider how interviewers’ ability to tailor their behavior to their interactional environments can affect whether an introduction reaches the point at which a request to participate is made, the form that this request takes, and the sample person’s response. This article contributes to understanding the social action of requesting and specifically how we might use insights from analyses of interaction to increase cooperation with requests to participate in surveys.
BattagliaMichael P.KhareMeenaFrankelMartin R.MurrayMary CayBuckleyPaulPeritzSaralyn. 2008. “Response Rates: How Have They Changed and Where Are They Headed?” Pp. 529–60 in Advances in Telephone Survey Methodology, edited by LepkowskiJ. M.TuckerC.BrickJ. M.de LeeuwE. D.JapecL.LavrakasP. J.LinkM. W.SangsterR. L.Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
2.
BrownPenelopeLevinsonStephen C.1987. Politeness: Some Universals of Language Use. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
CampanelliPamelaSturgisPatrickPurdonSusan. 1997. “Can You Hear Me Knocking: An Investigation into the Impact of Interviewers on Survey Response Rates.” The Survey Methods Centre at SCPR, Great Britain.
4.
CouperMick P.GrovesRobert M.1992. “The Role of the Interviewer in Survey Participation.” Survey Methodology18:263–77.
5.
CouperMick P.GrovesRobert M.2002. “Introductory Interactions in Telephone Surveys and Nonresponse.” Pp. 161–77 in Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview, edited by MaynardD. W.Houtkoop-SteenstraH.SchaefferN. C.van der ZouwenH.New York: Wiley Interscience.
6.
CurlTraci S.DrewPaul. 2008. “Contingency and Action: A Comparison of Two Forms of Requesting.” Research on Language & Social Interaction41:129–53.
7.
DavidsonJudy. 1984. “Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals Dealing with Potential or Actual Rejection.” Pp. 102–128 in Structures of Social Action, edited by AtkinsonJ. M.HeritageJ.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
DijkstraWilSmitJohannes H.2002. “Persuading Reluctant Recipients in Telephone Surveys.” Pp. 135–48 in Survey Nonresponse, edited by GrovesR.DillmanD.EltingeJ.LittleR.New York: John Wiley & Sons.
9.
GillVirginia Teas. 1998. “Doing Attributions in Medical Interaction: Patients’ Explanations for Illness and Doctors’ Responses.” Social Psychology Quarterly61:342–60.
10.
GoffmanErving. 1983. “The Interaction Order.” American Sociological Review48:1–17.
11.
GriceH. Paul. 1975. “Logic and Conversation.” Pp. 43–58 in Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3, Speech Acts, edited by ColeP.MorganJ. L.New York: Academic Press.
12.
GrovesRobert M.2006. “Nonresponse Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Household Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly70:646–75.
13.
GrovesRobert M.CialdiniRobert B.CouperMick P.1992. “Understanding the Decision to Participate in a Survey.” Public Opinion Quarterly56:475–95.
14.
GrovesRobert M.CouperMick P.1996. “Contact Level Influences on Cooperation in Face-to-Face Surveys.” Journal of Official Statistics12:63–83.
15.
GrovesRobert M.CouperMick P.1998. Nonresponse in Household Interview Surveys. New York: Wiley.
16.
GrovesRobert M.CouperMick P.PresserStanleySingerEleanorTourangeauRogerAcostaGiorgina PianiNelsonLindsay. 2006. “Experiments in Producing Nonresponse Bias.” Public Opinion Quarterly70:720–36.
17.
GrovesRobert M.SingerEleanorCorningAmy. 2000. “Leverage-Saliency Theory of Survey Participation: Description and an Illustration.” Public Opinion Quarterly64:299–308.
18.
HauserRobert M.2005. “Survey Response in the Long Run: The Wisconsin Longitudinal Study.” Field Methods17:3–29.
19.
HeinemannTrine. 2006. “‘Will You or Can’t You?’: Displaying Entitlement in Interrogative Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics38:1081–1104.
20.
HeritageJohn. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
21.
HeritageJohn. 1998. “Oh-Prefaced Responses to Inquiry.” Language in Society27:291–334.
22.
HeritageJohn. 2002. “Ad Hoc Inquiries: Two Preferences in the Design of Routine Questions in an Open Context.” Pp. 313–34 in Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview, edited by MaynardD. W.Houtkoop-SteenstraH.SchaefferN. C.van der ZouwenH.New York: Wiley Interscience.
23.
HollanderMatt. 2008. “The Interactional Organization of Telephone Survey Openings.” Master’s thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
24.
Houtkoop-SteenstraHannekevan den BerghHuub. 2002. “Effects of Introductions in Large Scale Telephone Survey Interviews.” Pp. 205–218 in Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview, edited by MaynardD. W.Houtkoop-SteenstraH.SchaefferN. C.van der ZouwenH.New York: Wiley Interscience.
25.
LindströmAnna. 2005. “Language as Social Action: A Study of How Senior Citizens Request Assistance with Practical Tasks in the Swedish Home Help Service.” Pp. 209–230 in Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the Use of Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-Interaction, edited by HakulinenA.SeltingM.Amsterdam: Benjamins.
26.
MaynardDouglas W.2003. Bad News, Good News: Conversational Order in Everyday Talk and Clinical Settings. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27.
MaynardDouglas W.HollanderMatthew M.2010. “Asking to Speak with Another: An Everyday Skill for the Telephone and Its Possible Effects on Survey Participation.” Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. Unpublished manuscript.
28.
MaynardDouglas W.SchaefferNora Cate. 1997. “Closing the Gate: Declinations of the Request to Participate in a Telephone Survey Interview.” Sociological Methods & Research26:34–79.
29.
MaynardDouglas W.SchaefferNora Cate. 2000. “Toward a Sociology of Social Scientific Knowledge: Survey Research and Ethnomethodology’s Asymmetric Alternates.” Social Studies of Science30:264–312.
30.
MaynardDouglas W.SchaefferNora Cate. 2002a. “Opening and Closing the Gate: The Work of Optimism in Recruiting Survey Respondents.” Pp. 179–205 in Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview, edited by MaynardD. W.Houtkoop-SteenstraH.SchaefferN. C.van der ZouwenH.New York: Wiley Interscience.
31.
MaynardDouglas W.SchaefferNora Cate. 2002b. “Refusal Conversion and Tailoring.” Pp. 219–39 in Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview, edited by MaynardD. W.Houtkoop-SteenstraH.SchaefferN. C.van der ZouwenH.New York: Wiley Interscience.
Morton-WilliamsJeanYoungPenny. 1987. “Obtaining the Survey Interview: An Analysis of Tape Recorded Doorstep Introductions.” Journal of the Market Research Society29:35–52.
34.
MüllerFrank Ernst. 1996. “Affiliating and Disaffiliating with Continuers: Prosodic Aspects of Recipiency.” Pp. 131–76 in Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies, edited by Couper-KuhlenE.SeltingM.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35.
NolenJason. 2008. “Entitlement, Contingency, and Presumption in the Request for Survey Participation.” Master’s thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
36.
PomerantzAnita. 1984. “Pursuing a Response.” Pp.152–64 in Structures of Social Action, edited by AtkinsonJ. M.HeritageJ.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
RooseHenkLievensJohnWaegeHans. 2007. “The Joint Effect of Topic Interest and Follow-Up Procedures on the Response in a Mail Questionnaire: An Empirical Test of the Leverage-Saliency Theory in Audience Research.” Sociological Methods & Research35:410–28.
38.
SacksHarvey. 1989. “Lecture One: Rules of Conversational Sequence.” Human Studies12:217–27.
39.
SchaefferNora CateGarbarskiDanaFreeseJeremyMaynardDouglas W.2010. “Beyond the Paradigmatic Opening: Sample Members’ Questions and Their Placement in the Call for Participation.” Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. Unpublished manuscript.
40.
SchegloffEmanuel A.1979. “Identification and Recognition in Telephone Openings.” Pp. 23–78 in Everyday Language, edited by PsathasG.New York: Erlbaum.
41.
SchegloffEmanuel A.1980. “Preliminaries to Preliminaries: ‘Can I Ask You a Question?’” Sociological Inquiry50:104–152.
42.
SchegloffEmanuel A.2007. Sequence Organization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43.
SearleJohn R.1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44.
SearleJohn R.1975. “Indirect Speech Acts.” Pp. 59–82 in Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3, Speech Acts, edited by ColeP.MorganJ. L.New York: Academic Press.
45.
StiversTanya. 2008. “Stance, Alignment, and Affiliation during Storytelling: When Nodding Is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language & Social Interaction41:31–57.
46.
VinkhuyzenErikSzymanskiMargaret H.2005. “Would You Like to Do It Yourself? Service Requests and Their Non-granting Responses.” Pp. 91–106 in Applying Conversation Analysis, edited by RichardsK.SeedhouseP.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
47.
WattsRichard J.2003. Politeness. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48.
WeathersbeeT. ElizabethMaynardDouglas W.2009. “Dialing for Donations: Practices and Actions in the Telephone Solicitation of Human Tissues.” Sociology of Health & Illness31:803–816.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
